COAAST seeks discharge ban

2-Pr." Democrot, Sonto Rosa, Colif., Friday, April 9,, 1971 1
COAAST Seeks :
Discharge Ban I
Californians Organized to Ac- fluenL"
quire Access to State Tidelands COAAST then expanded its
~i~~A~;f) t~e s~~~:~: t:l~~:~f~ ~I~~~~l, b~aYii~L~~ra~~~~ Ofi~~J
coastline is a "no-<l.ischarge" soil and channels which eventu­area.
ally reach the ocean is not ac-
Wednesday CO A A S T peti- ceptable. Efficient means are
tioned the State Water Re- available for process of effluent,
sources Control Board for such and such shQuld be instituted
a declaration, the g1'OUp'S presi- with each new housing develop­dent
Charles Hinkle reading to ment p r {) p {) sed along our
the board, "It is clear that un- coast."
~~~de o~oenc!~~r~~ Ji~~~~ar~~nini~ re;td~r:~~t\~:to~e~e~::t~~~ti~~1
the Pacific Ocean along our b,e notified of the state's inten~
(.'Qastline. ea~l~ coun,ty will h,e I ~~~. that the waters. along. its
[ol'cedtopelJt!Onitslocalarea~stshouldnotbedeflled.
board concerning thIS
issue,"
COAAST had requested of the
board last November that the
Sonoma County coastline be de­clared
a no-discharge area, and
aL its meeting Wedneroay, the
regional board stipulated that
there be "no direct discharge
into the waters of the Pacific" at
Bodega Harbor, Jenner Bay and
Sea Ranchdevelopment-s 1 and 2,
the requirements to "reflect
complete land disposal of ef· 1

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.